and super micro being looked at sideways...any chicanery going on there?

They have a history.
They were just another vendor advertising in The Computer Weekly in the Bay Area before the internet. Always wondered why people got so excited about them lately.
At least they're blowing up in the S&P 500 and not in XMHQ.

Latest favorite of Hindenburg -- short seller.
Edit: SCMI has also reported delaying filing of 10-K. I am guessing the Hindenburg report must have spooked the auditors. In a year when Hindenburg took down the Adani and Carl Icahn empires, any auditor should get nervous.

BB I have to prioritize my time
FD if this is true you wouldn't post so much.

Write non-repetitive and non-political posts and I will read 100% of your posts too. Also, strive for brevity if you want others to read all your posts. You are so focused on yourself, you are not able to distinguish a friend from a foe. Just ask your once friends Chang and Norbert.
While at it go read about James Carville and Mary Matalin.

@Old_Joe
+1

Hey Old Joe, leave me out of this...I have no interest any longer posting/debating about politics on this site...it's not a good use of my time, ya'll know I disagree with most folks politics on this site and vice versa so what's the point? Let's all vote and see what happens.
I'm wondering what folks make of NVDA's earning call and super micro being looked at sideways...any chicanery going on there? I've sold over 1/2 my holdings in TSUMX due to the sudden mgr change...looking hard at BRK.B, WMT, IAU and maybe TWEIX...

Since we're making notes, let's also note that this post was not remotely Off-Topic until FD1000 chose to take it there. And also for the record, it's posters like FD1000 and Baseball_Fan who are the most frequent offenders in introducing overtly political commentary into otherwise non-political discussions.
When this happens, other posters immediately suggest moving a thread to the OT section. This effectively gives the frequent offenders the power to cause entire threads to be "banished" to OT Land because of their deliberate violation of the customary ground rules.
I don't buy it.

I could be imagining but I thought the new holdings are available to us after 60 days (30 for the fund + 30 after for the SEC) of month end. If so, that is pretty useless information. I would want the info to be made available within 15 days after the month end. Makes no sense to make it more difficult for retails clients to gain info than accredited investors through Forms 13Fs.
To manage the SEC load, and make the info available more timely for all other ETFs and OEFs investors, SEC should not have imposed the changes on transparent ETFs.
This SEC's desire for power grab always seems to override the need to advocate for retail investors.

New Rules Press Release,
https://www.sec.gov/newsroom/press-releases/2024-110
New Rules Fact Sheet,
https://www.sec.gov/files/ic-35308-fact-sheet.pdf
My reading is that N-PORT filing of month-end holdings will be within 30 days, but those filings will be made public after 60 days of the month-end. So, there will be 2 month lag in public reporting of month-end holdings.

Putin invaded Ukraine because he saw Biden as a "weak" Prez. Sure. And then, even granting that wild accusation, the administration proved Pootie wrong as wrong could be ... although FD's party tried to hand Ukraine over to Putin by refusing for months to authorize funding for Ukraine's defense.
@Observant1: good catch on that Afghanistan fact check.

@Observant1- Your dependence on "facts" is unfortunate, as facts are not recognized or appreciated by certain individuals. Generally, those individuals deal primarily in "alternate facts", which frequently present themselves as a subcategory of "lies".

FD1000,
Wow, there's lots to unpack in your commentary!
I'll just comment on two topics.
"Obamacare had a huge affect long-term."
You're correct that "Obamacare" had huge long-term effects:
1) More than 16 million Americans obtained coverage within five years' passage of Obamacare.
2) People with preexisting conditions can't he denied health insurance.
3) Prescription drug costs are more affordable for many Medicare participants.
4) More screenings and preventative services are covered with low copays or deductibles.
5) Insurance companies can no longer set lifetime limits for coverage.
"After the embarrassing exit from Afghanistan, Putin realized that Biden is a weak pres and why he invaded Ukraine."

Both Trump & Biden were eager to withdraw US troops from Afghanistan.
Trump struck a deal for withdrawal by May 1, 2021.
Biden inherited this deal but delayed the withdrawal date.
The withdrawal was problematic, to say the least,
but to blame this entirely on Biden is disingenuous.
https://www.factcheck.org/2021/08/timeline-of-u-s-withdrawal-from-afghanistan/
Edit/Add:
"On the first week of Biden's presidency, "Biden’s orders direct the secretary of the Interior Department
to halt new oil and natural gas leases on public lands and waters,
and begin a thorough review of existing permits for fossil fuel development.
Do you think the above has nothing to do why oil started to go up?
Oil is a huge resource in our economy, don't you think it increased inflation?"
Many different factors can influence oil prices.
You may want to contemplate potential causes before rushing to judgement and playing the "blame game."
https://usafacts.org/articles/what-impacts-the-price-of-oil/

I respectfully disagree.
Kinnel wrote: "purely a screen; I don’t make any additions or subtractions." He says these are "simple, strict screens." Either one can access a particular share class or one can't.
The hoops one must jump through don't render a share class inaccessible. The only exception he makes to strict adherence to his rules is that he excludes actively managed funds costing under 10 basis points if you must pay a fee to access them.
Put another way, you might have to pay a small ransom to use a platform necessary to access a share class costing 20 basis points. But that doesn't matter. All that matters are those 20 basis points, not the total cost of access.
Likewise, the fact that you might have to have a small fortune in other funds in order to invest a "mere" $50K in a share class doesn't matter. All that matters is that $50K minimum, not the total size of your portfolio.

FD1000,
I gather someone with address your drivel. I will say that one again you exhibit that you are as unhinged as your idol. Keep drinking the Kool-Aid.

No need to be extreme. The pres in office can have a big affect on many things.
Obamacare had a huge affect long-term. IMO, it was one of the worst legislation. I priced what healthcare would cost me and my wife prior to Medicare.
Before Obamacare it was $400 monthly with a $3K deductible.
After Obamacare it was $1200-1300 monthly with a $5-6K deductible. That was years ago. I know several people who pay now about $1000 per person and 7-9K deductible.
(link) On the first week of Biden's presidency, "Biden’s orders direct the secretary of the Interior Department to halt new oil and natural gas leases on public lands and waters, and begin a thorough review of existing permits for fossil fuel development.
Do you think the above has nothing to do why oil started to go up? Oil is a huge resource in our economy, don't you think it increased inflation?
After the embarrassing exit from Afghanistan, Putin realized that Biden is a weak pres and why he invaded Ukraine. He also did on Obama watch but not during Trump.
How much money does the US allocate to Ukraine? easy over $100 billion.
Why did 4 Arab countries sign a peace agreement with Israel during Trump, which is the first time ever, while the Middle East is on fire now?
When Harris said she wants price control, don't you think it would affect us in a big way?
So yes, several presidents are more influential than others.

@hank "Marks is big on buying at a discount and holding long term."
FD: Millions tried the above while only a small % have done, Buffett. I have read his articles for a couple years, but he never helped me with my trading which is mostly in bond funds because....read what I said above, generalities and shades of gray.
Quotes from the article:
What this means is that in good times, investors obsess about the positives, ignore the negatives, and interpret things favorably. Then, when the pendulum swings, they do the opposite, with dramatic effects.
The human brain is wired to ignore or reject incoming data that is at odds with prior beliefs, and investors are particularly good at this.
Further complicating things in terms of rational analysis is the fact that most developments in the investment world can be interpreted both positively and negatively, depending on the prevailing mood.
Rarely do investors realize that (a) there can be a limit to the run of good news or (b) an upswing can be so strong as to be excessive, rendering a downswing inevitable. (FD; SPY,QQQ have been going strong for 15 years).
In short, sometimes the things that have gone up the most should be expected to continue to go up the most, and sometimes the things that have gone up the least should be expected to go up the most.
The above is meaningless unless you mention the specifics.
At least the best nugget by Buffet and Bogle = buy the SP500 for accumulators and go sleep for decades.

If you hold for years and diversified it's not for you.
+1.

Working hard and long hours in IT helps you in the long run...or...you can just be lazy and cry later why you didn't make the big bucks.
Of course, you can be lucky and do well.
I decided after about 12 years that I would never work more than 40-45 per week in IT and I did it at over 90-95%.
All my efforts went to investing...and it worked.

Dueling, context-free, mismatched numbers:
Q1/2017 through Q2/2020 vs. Wikipedia's "real wage" figures from the "2017–2019 period".
There's a well known golf saying (a rule, actually): Play it where it lies.
Covid hit during Trump's administration. That's the hand he was dealt. The economy he inherited was strong and growing. That's also part of the hand he was delt. You don't get to cherry pick dates any more than you do when looking at investment performance.
But for fun, let's go with it. We'll use March 2020 as the month that COVID struck. That's when WHO declared it a pandemic. That's the month when number of workers employed started to drop; they fell through the floor in April.

https://fred.stlouisfed.org/graph/?g=1taIE
Since we're agreed that Covid distorts things, we'll count the numbers only up to Covid, i.e. through Feb 2020. The original FRED graph (median real employment wages) doesn't have that sort of granularity. So instead, here's a graph of nominal wages. (With inflation so low, Y/Y dropping to nearly 0 in April 2020, nominal or real is no big diff.)

https://fred.stlouisfed.org/graph/?g=1taJw
Sure enough, there's that spike that accounts for the outsized increase in wages. But take a closer look. As we zoom in, we see that the jump occurred in April 2020, i.e. as a result of Covid. Average wages spiked (perhaps as businesses shut down lower paid workers were disproportionately unemployed?), then declined and within 2-3 months resumed the same upward trend they had been on all along.

https://fred.stlouisfed.org/graph/?g=1taKg
Just as we're not giving the blame to Trump for the precipitous drop in employment in April 2020, we don't give the credit to Trump for the spike in wages that same month.

The FOMC started raising rates in 3/1/22, so here is the run from 3/1/22 from TestFol for LQD, LQDH, m-mkt VMFXX, ultra-ST ICSH. LQDH has definitely outperformed LQD, as expected due to rate-hedging. LQDH kept pace with VMFXX and ICSH until 4/30/23, but then outperformed subsequently. When the rates start to go down, LQD should shine - why hedge bond funds when rates are falling?
LINK

Thanks @Catch - I agree LQD has done much better over time. But look at the 2022 performance of the 2 funds.
While we can compare performance to other bond funds, I’m mostly interested in how the use of interest rate swaps to hedge rate sensitivity could blow up. Are there hidden dangers in this kind of hedging? On the surface it looks like a simple way to capture the difference between what Treasuries return and what investment grade corporates do. I’ve compared the return over 10 years to money market funds, short term bond funds and ultra-short bond funds. It seems to have done better - and on a reasonably consistent basis.

Looking at M* for the past several months, LQD has outperformed LQDH for each of the monthly periods. One might have expected better from LQDH in anticipation of rate cuts and their swaps, etc. The portfolio indicates 95% of the portfolio is LQD. Am I correct with this and what you see?
You noted:

M* shows LQDH returning north of 3% annually over the past 10 years. That’s about double what money market funds achieved.

MMKT's were paying only about .01% yields for many years. As of April, 2022 the Fido MMKT's were paying .11% yield. This is when the move up to the current yields began. So, comparing to 10 years backwards against a MMKT yield 'is not valid'.
6 month CHART of the two.